Worst error?

[Dark Cloud]

We don't know if the LBH was a unique situation. It was certainly rare to the Army in size, but there had been other large gatherings with whites and one against and perhaps more without.

The comparison with Kildeer Mt. was on the precise point that the Indians (and they were essentially the same tribes at issue) did not always run when confronted with the Army. They moved to attack. Given that the Army was devoted to the theory of the tribes always running, you'd think that - since they were expecting a large village - they might dismiss the small village scenarios and focus on what they knew of big villages when confronted. Big villages require a command structure and submission of authority Indians did not easily concede to each other, and could not dash off like smaller groups whatever the intent.

The 7th didn't know much, but there was clear evidence the Sioux would not run - and on short notice, really cannot without a fight -which Custer, if he knew or cared, chose to ignore.

As far as I know, when in camp warriors kept their prime ponies near and ready to go with the others out to graze as standard operating procedure. In a fresh camp, herding all within would last one night and then they'd have to move or put the herd out with groups of men to protect them. So, I'm not seeing the head slapping strangeness of Boyer's description, since the various camps on the Rosebud were of short, one night durations except for the Sun Dance site. That was SOP and soldiers would have known and understood.

In a large generic camp - the distinction was made and clear - there generally were one or two large herds of mounts dependent upon grass and the ability to keep track. That camp circles had clumps of favorite warrior mounts doesn't hurt the contention, and the descriptions of the scouts vectored in on the one huge herd.

Again, you falsely summarize my position to one you want to attack because it's easier, and you like to pose as a hero defending things not under attack, rather than what was said.

There's much to experience and learn from reading about - which too many here elevate to 'researching' and 'studying' - the LBH about our own history and that of others and how history is written and why. But so much of the LBH discourse comes down to how each man died, his last actions and who he in turned killed and with what weapon and its ballistic qualities, the creepy fascinations with specific genital mutilations, trying to apply modern templates of social revolution to the Indians, trying to apply modern crimes to the 1876 7th, and an insistence on minutiae memorization and an absolute abhorrence of trying to absorb the mental world that then existed, which formed the tools for how the participants remembered it.

And, yes, it is tiring to have essentially the same exchanges with different people for years.

I still think AZ and Zekesgirl's confirmation of the Benteen scout and destruction of the slanders against him, irrefutably, was an exceedingly important effort to confirm the previous work of not widely read people on the subject plus drop kick the posturings of those who have never ridden the route, nor ridden the field, nor ride at all. Nobody can say that Benteen's route was barely longer or more difficult than Custer's down Ash Creek and that he in any way dawdled.

Regarding names, Germans were Jerrys and Brits were Tommys and VC were Charlies. Japanese call Chinese Chinks in their newspapers of the war, so this isn't a western prejudice solely.

[fred]

"Victor Charlie" was strictly military radio phonetics. "VC" on the radio sounds entirely too much like too many other letters. No one-- at least of those I ever knew-- referred to the Viet Cong as "Victor Charlie" in normal conversation. It was always just, "Charlie."

Best wishes,
Fred.

[El Crab]

Nov 22, 2011 13:52:25 GMT -6 fred said:

"Victor Charlie" was strictly military radio phonetics. "VC" on the radio sounds entirely too much like too many other letters. No one-- at least of those I ever knew-- referred to the Viet Cong as "Victor Charlie" in normal conversation. It was always just, "Charlie."

Best wishes,
Fred.

Good to know.

[quincannon]

Yes Crab Victor Charlie is from the phonetic alphabet just like - Kilo Echo Oscar Golf Hotel - India Sierra - Alfa - Hotel Oscar Romeo Sierra Echo Sierra - Alfa Sierra Sierra

[El Crab]

Nov 22, 2011 23:39:46 GMT -6 quincannon said:

Yes Crab Victor Charlie is from the phonetic alphabet just like - Kilo Echo Oscar Golf Hotel - India Sierra - Alfa - Hotel Oscar Romeo Sierra Echo Sierra - Alfa Sierra Sierra

Yeah. I know the signs. I just didn't know Victor Charlie was only really used via radio. I figured it started with troops calling the VC that at first, then it becoming just Charlie.

I was never in the military but I have several friends who were. Learned the phonetic callsigns rather quickly.

[El Crab]

I just now saw what you did there, quincannon.

[bc]

romeo yankee tango alpha yankee - india golf papa alpha yankee - alpha tango india november lima alpha yankee

bc

[benteen]

Nov 23, 2011 1:53:46 GMT -6 bc said:

romeo yankee tango alpha yankee - india golf papa alpha yankee - alpha tango india november lima alpha yankee

bc

Britt, they should have thought of Pig Latin during WW2. Wouldn't have needed the wind-talkers.

Be Well
Dan

[shan]

Hunk,

Maybe I expressed myself badly. Let me try again. I have always believed that if we take the Indian evidence as a whole; ignore the details given by any one individual, and just put it all into a big pot and see what sort of smell it gives off, then, I would contend that one thing seems to come across very strongly and that is that after Custers command were sighted in and around a ford; and we can argue about which ford that was, be it B or D, they were hassled back towards the high ridges in pretty quick order, and then dealt with piecemeal, again in pretty quick order. I would further contend that the scatter of bodies all over the field tends to bear that out. I know that many, if not most people on these boards have real problems with the Indian evidence, but apart from the positions of the dead, its pretty much all we have.

Okay those are the tabloid headlines if you like, and as you live over here, { can the channel isles be bracketed as over here? } you'll know how contentious tabloid headlines are at the moment. I'm not arguing there was any plan on the part of the hostiles, it was just the way things unfolded. Initially, I suspect they were as surprised as the soldiers, but once they saw the way things were going they took full advantage of it.

So as I say, maybe I expressed myself badly, but in my opinion, what unfolded shortly after after Custer arrived in the general vicinity of MTF, had less to do with him making bad decisions, and more to do with him having to react to an unexpected level of aggression.

As to the Killdear Mountain episode, unless I am deep into an Altzemer episode I think that must have been another poster. That does however allow me to make a comment on how my mind works, and this is not only pertinent to what I post on this board. As I've often said to Fred, if only I had a smidgin of the logical kind of mind he seems to have, but I don't, so I'll have to make do with what I've got. Speaking as a kind of by stander, it seems to me that my mind tends to roam freely over all sorts of subjects, settling on some before drifting off again without having formed any firm opinions that I feel a need to defend because I feel I'm in possession of the facts. Like most people I often embarrass myself by saying something that I have no firm opinion on as if I'm some kind of expert, which, more often than not I'm patently not, and then having to defend an untenable position.

Yes, I do sometimes feel that, " We are all wasting our time discussing anything on this forum on the basis that there is nothing new to find." But that was yesterday, today, I'm half inclined to agree with you when you say, " That our discussions do from time to time lead us as individuals to make fresh adjustments to our prior beliefs. That in itself makes these boards a valuable asset, " But, did I really imply that I wanted to drive fresh young minds away with scorn and ridicule? If so then I apologise.

One thing we all have to bear in mind when reading almost everyones posts. The flat words on the page often disguise, or maybe fail to illuminate, a cheeky smile, a deep throat chuckle, a glower or even a violent storm of suppressed rage couched in reams of polite prose. Tricky things words.

Shan

["Hunk" Papa]

Nov 23, 2011 12:47:03 GMT -6 shan said:

Hunk,

Maybe I expressed myself badly. Let me try again. I have always believed that if we take the Indian evidence as a whole; ignore the details given by any one individual, and just put it all into a big pot and see what sort of smell it gives off, then, I would contend that one thing seems to come across very strongly and that is that after Custers command were sighted in and around a ford; and we can argue about which ford that was, be it B or D, they were hassled back towards the high ridges in pretty quick order, and then dealt with piecemeal, again in pretty quick order. I would further contend that the scatter of bodies all over the field tends to bear that out. I know that many, if not most people on these boards have real problems with the Indian evidence, but apart from the positions of the dead, its pretty much all we have.

Okay those are the tabloid headlines if you like, and as you live over here, { can the channel isles be bracketed as over here? } you'll know how contentious tabloid headlines are at the moment. I'm not arguing there was any plan on the part of the hostiles, it was just the way things unfolded. Initially, I suspect they were as surprised as the soldiers, but once they saw the way things were going they took full advantage of it.

So as I say, maybe I expressed myself badly, but in my opinion, what unfolded shortly after after Custer arrived in the general vicinity of MTF, had less to do with him making bad decisions, and more to do with him having to react to an unexpected level of aggression.

As to the Killdear Mountain episode, unless I am deep into an Altzemer episode I think that must have been another poster. That does however allow me to make a comment on how my mind works, and this is not only pertinent to what I post on this board. As I've often said to Fred, if only I had a smidgin of the logical kind of mind he seems to have, but I don't, so I'll have to make do with what I've got. Speaking as a kind of by stander, it seems to me that my mind tends to roam freely over all sorts of subjects, settling on some before drifting off again without having formed any firm opinions that I feel a need to defend because I feel I'm in possession of the facts. Like most people I often embarrass myself by saying something that I have no firm opinion on as if I'm some kind of expert, which, more often than not I'm patently not, and then having to defend an untenable position.

Yes, I do sometimes feel that, " We are all wasting our time discussing anything on this forum on the basis that there is nothing new to find." But that was yesterday, today, I'm half inclined to agree with you when you say, " That our discussions do from time to time lead us as individuals to make fresh adjustments to our prior beliefs. That in itself makes these boards a valuable asset, " But, did I really imply that I wanted to drive fresh young minds away with scorn and ridicule? If so then I apologise.

One thing we all have to bear in mind when reading almost everyones posts. The flat words on the page often disguise, or maybe fail to illuminate, a cheeky smile, a deep throat chuckle, a glower or even a violent storm of suppressed rage couched in reams of polite prose. Tricky things words.

Shan

David, see Reply #285 and mine following to get some insight on a couple of the comments I made to you.

I agree in general with what you say and especially about flat words on the screen. Believe me, I have no quarrel with you as previous correspondence will verify.

You do paint delightful word pictures.

Hunk

["Hunk" Papa]

Nov 14, 2011 10:16:14 GMT -6 Dark Cloud said:

Oh dear Daicee, what are we going to do with you my little poppet? Even by your own convoluted misuse of the English language your latest pathetic attempt to make your original meaning morph into a different meaning in your latest post by pretending you meant something else in the first place is not even subtle. Let us see what you said originally and by the way, “flense” out their mounts when ‘flense’ means strip the blubber or skin from a whale or seal?:

In a big village there are one or two very big horse herds. There is no command structure with one guy able to order this or that to happen. Small villages, like the one at the Washita separated by necessity from many others, can react pretty fast, and move and defend. But it takes comparatively forever with the bigger villages, relatively speaking, who [sic – should be which]have to flense out their mounts with a thousand others doing the same. These big gatherings were not common, and they had rarely been attacked, and when attacked behaved differently and SLOWER than the smaller camps, as at Kildeer Mt. and the LBH.

Because of the time issue the larger villages HAVE to put on a defense of more substance than pack up and run and the warriors fight a rear guard. The dust and confusion would be incredible.

Now that whole context is about large (presumably outlying, though not made clear) horse herds slowing down the reaction time of large villages. You cite Killdeer (note correct spelling) Mt. and the LBH as examples of big gatherings which behaved “differently and SLOWER” when attacked and your wording makes it clear that the “different and SLOWER” behaviour was as a result of their inability to obtain mounts quickly. Indeed Shan responded on exactly that basis.
With that clear meaning from your original words and context firmly in mind, we move on to your later post:

The comparison with Kildeer Mt. was on the precise point that the Indians (and they were essentially the same tribes at issue) did not always run when confronted with the Army. They moved to attack. Given that the Army was devoted to the theory of the tribes always running, you'd think that - since they were expecting a large village - they might dismiss the small village scenarios and focus on what they knew of big villages when confronted. Big villages require a command structure and submission of authority Indians did not easily concede to each other, and could not dash off like smaller groups whatever the intent.

Er no, does not compute. Your original post lumps Killdeer and the LBH together as two examples of the same problem, namely large villages reacting slowly when attacked by the military and although I spelt it out to Shan, I will repeat it here for you to try and absorb the second time around.

When Sully approached Killdeer the Indians, who knew he was coming, were waiting for him mounted up ready to fight. Even if they had not already been mounted, there was plenty of time for them to collect their horses as before any fighting took place there was a parley at which agreement could not be reached. The fighting then commenced, mostly at long range and with effective use of the artillery. After about 5 hours Sully made his final advance, pounded the village with artillery fire and the Indians fled, leaving behind hundreds of tipis and other supplies, but tellingly, no horses. This is not comparable with the LBH other than for Indian numbers perhaps and the Indians did not 'move to attack' at Killdeer, they were set up for defence plus they were prepared so did not react slowly as per your template.

There is one other significant difference. At Killdeer the Indians were ready because they knew Sully was coming, at LBH the Indians were surprised hence the horse problem and you can opine what you like about what the army should have been thinking, but you weren’t around in 1876 so it’s easy to be wise post-event.

So what other pearls have you dropped before us.

We don't know if the LBH was a unique situation. It was certainly rare to the Army in size, but there had been other large gatherings with whites and one against and perhaps more without.

English as she should not be used, but if you believe that there had been other large gatherings of Indians which had, even rarely, been assailed by the military, then please cite specific examples. You will not be able to for the simple reason that the LBH WAS unique and you are merely inferring other possibilities in a vain attempt to prove me wrong on this point.

Nothing else you say is of much interest except to say that some of us are cast in the heroic mould whilst sad little wannabes like you are consigned to the shadows. There are though, two comments that need to be addressed:

Regarding names, Germans were Jerrys [sic]and Brits were Tommys [sic] and VC were Charlies. Japanese call Chinese Chinks in their newspapers of the war, so this isn't a western prejudice solely.

Of course derogatory epithets are not confined to western culture. The context was about demeaning your enemy and you have done a fine job for me as all the examples you quote except for one, are terms that were used in that way. The one exception is ‘Tommies’ which was originated by the British Army itself when they used the sample name ‘Tommy Atkins’ on the example enlistment forms for private soldiers. And later immortalised by Rudyard Kipling in his poem ‘Tommy’,

“Then it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ ‘Tommy ‘ow’s yer soul?’
But it’s ‘Thin red line of ‘eroes’ when the drums begin to roll.

Finally:

And, yes, it is tiring to have essentially the same exchanges with different people for years.

Well there are two obvious solutions. The first is stay off these boards, but of course you could not then indulge in the sneering you so patently enjoy. The second is that once you get really tired, go and lie down on the nearest freeway. ;D

Please don’t take any of this personally ‘cos I still love you.

As Terence once said, “Homo sum; humani nil a me alienum puto”

[fred]

Nov 23, 2011 0:00:11 GMT -6 El Crab said:

I just didn't know Victor Charlie was only really used via radio. I figured it started with troops calling the VC that at first, then it becoming just Charlie.

Crab,

I never heard anyone use "Victor Charlie," other than on the radio. That doesn't mean nobody did, but it would have been highly unlikely. We have this affinity for abbreviating things, using acronyms and the like, and it would have been unusual to hear guys walking around referring to the enemy in terms longer than "VC" or "Charlie."

I was a textbook stickler for proper radio procedure and while we were in a war zone, I used and tolerated foul language, but call signs were always demanded, regardless of how the conversation was going on; "over" was always used; "out" was always used; and the two were never used together such as you hear in the flicks, "over and out." Whenever you hear that, you know the guy has no earthly clue, and I ripped more than one ass for lousy procedure. I even remember chastising superiors when they spoke improperly on the radio to my officers. There was a reason for all that and it wasn't mere pedantry. We used shackle codes regularly; knew when to give locations in the clear; knew map references and map checkpoints I designed myself, and on and on. I would like to believe we were as professional as you could get. My men certainly performed that way.

Best wishes,
Fred.

[rosebud]

On this board and on the other board, I keep reading about the Killdeer Mt and the LBH. I do not understand why they ever try and use these as a comparison of how the Indians should or might respond to soldiers. Killdeer was in 1864. The Indians got their butts kicked and used that as a learning experience on how not to fight. Thinking they would fight the same way is beyond my comprehension.

If it was that easy to fight the Indians they would not send three columns out to hunt for the Indians. One would have been plenty.

Colonel Hal Moore in Battle of Landing Zone X-Ray. I would think this would be closer to the LBH story.

Rosebud

[quincannon]

Rosebud: LZ X-Ray was similar in the fact that the numbers were so overwhelmingly one sided. The finding had been accomplished previously by C/1-9 Cavalry, so there was no hunting involved. Moore and 1-7 knwe they were there and went in to bring them to battle.

The story that is most like LBH is 2-7's march from LZ X-Ray to LZ Albany the next day.

[wild]

Hi Hunk
My views were explained at length in my previous post, much of which you have chosen to ignore
I prefer to keep posts short and to the point.For example you take issue with the term battle and post I would also challenge your use of the word ‘battle.’ It is my contention that Custer was not expecting a battle
This is tangential and pure spectulation.To pursue it would be to enter the realm of the absurd and I won't go there.

In other words, the army commanders in 1876 saw what their subconscious prejudices induced them to see, not the realities. Custer was no exception, but he was not in isolation.
This philosophy is almost biblical such is it's hold on military thinking?Did you use the word "blinkered" to describe it?And why was Benteen not with the programme?He had a totally different attitude with his "don't you think we should keep the regiment together general?"
We are amazed that any military commander with only 550 men would even consider trying to attack a gathering of 8,000-10,000 people with a fighting strength of 2,000-2,500 warriors
No that is not what is amazing.What's amazing is that you excuse a commander who deployed his 550 men, poorly trained according to you,so that only 130 of them come into action.
Why would contempt for the enemy excuse such recklessness?Why would all the drills be jettisoned in favour of an ad hoc arrangement with only Custer privy to the attack plan?
One would think that there was enough evidence that the Indians were not endowed with the fighting qualities of the Dodo.These were hunter gatherers with the emphasis on hunter.And coming to kill them was a regiment of poorly trained garrison troops.
I really think Hunk you make too much of this contempt theory.
Best Regards